They can probably smell them from the choppers. Sitruc tells me it is very realistic to smell people and know exactly where they are from a good ways off.

As much as I like the old ones, I fell in love with the new ones first, I would rather not have Turn Based back, I wouldn't mind a new Fallout in the style of the old ones but if its the only option then I dont want it.

How they are now would probably be more succesfull than Turn based. But from what i seen the turn based now looks totatly different from TB in the 90's

Lolz Sit, seems to me you still don't grasp the meaning of Perception despite your dictionary definition. You argue for "realistic" but all your counter points are not. Perception is where visual acuity is measured in game. Just because you can see something doesn't mean you can hit it by any means. People with poor eyesight make poor shots, because they can't make out detail at range. Hence like in the originals, you get big penalties for low perception with ranged weapons. Thats totally "realistic".

Also "roll play the shot" Really? So your telling me when you play FO3 you make it a priority to purposely miss the target the majority of the time when you have low skill? Like in the beginning when you have say 20 skill you make yourself miss 80% of the time? I call BS on that one.

It's an example of what you called "magic" ... Dots on a screen.

Am I role-playing Gordon Freeman in Half-Life? You ask. ...... Yes that is the role-play (that was his name, right?).

Smell, another example of perception possibility .... you can perceive a smell, you know.

Come back when you are less confused.

Quoted for the truth

Yes.

Have you never seen a TV program showing them and what the see.

No I didn't call dots on a screen magic. I called the compass all characters in Fallout 3 have that inexplicably allows them to detect enemies they would have no way of seeing with pinpoint accuracy magic. It is magic. Or more accurately is an incredibly unrealistic game mechanic which doesn't actually bother me. You'd think it would bother someone who is so insistent on "realistic roleplaying" though.



Cool. So here is further confirmation that you have absolutely no clue what role-playing means or what an RPG is. Because, shocker, Half Life is not an RPG. Not even an "action" RPG. So your idea of roleplaying is completely indistinguishable from every FPS game ever made. I think I'll go "roleplay" in Doom some.



Indeed. I can also perceive that the entire premise of smelling your enemies as an excuse for the magic compass is laughable.

Yes it's roll-played, in as much as you have built up your character's abilities .... and lack of roll-playing abilities:-

The player's aim though pointing "spot on" will miss because of inaccuraces of skill in that gun, giving bullet inaccuracy, lack of roll-play by not repairing the weapon to max, lack of roll-play in not building you Repair to max.

A lesson in roll-play. (you're welcome)

Turn-base sacrifices BETTER role-play.

Real-time play, the player does what turn-base did ... but with more true-to-life role-play and realism.

Real-time-play. - is "True to the role" of better life-like truism and true-to-life role-play.

Turn-base play does not have that true-to-life role-play realism.

'Nuff said. Now:-

GO say NO to TB.

From what I've read of your posts here I think you're mistaking immersion with roleplaying.
You want to immerse yourself into the character as much as possible.
That is only done with FPP for you.
That's what important to you.
Not the actual RPG mechanics.

I miss the good days when an RPG were bigger on action and consequence.
Again though, I would absolutely love to have TB back as an optional game mode.

Exactly. He's confusing immersion with actual role-playing.

Yeah, because what he's talking about you can apply to every FPS. You're behind the eyes of the character you play, therefore the game is meant to give you a feel of being there and immerse you in the world you are experiencing. When I hear "role playing", the first thing I think about is not that I have to be behind the eyes of the character I made and actually be him and feel like I am in the world (although that is important in an RPG aswell... actually, in most games) but I think of the mechanics, like skills, stats, perks, traits and leveling up to put points into them and that they make my characters good at different things so they'll be unique and can do different things on their respective playthrough. Then you also come up with a story and a personality for him/her.

so, baron, immersion is what is what makes an RPG? CoD is an RPG, it is FPS, its graphics are SWEEEEEET, and it has realistic damage, so it is super immersive, and it is like the character and player are the same thing, so it must be an RPG!?

You are building an argument on a broken foundation.

Which is why turn-based games aren't seen much beyond gameboy games(least that I am aware of).

Cid Meyer Civilization, Heroes Of Might and Magic and Final Fantasy and their sagas wants to say hi

Never played any of them so I couldn't possibly know.

and the eternally youthful and permanently amazing Fallout and Fallout 2.

I was talking about games that some out nowadays as it seems that wasn't obvious.

I think that's half the point some have been trying to get across in this thread. :thumbsup:

Equating the turn-based gaming you see in Fallout 1 as the extent of what the genre is innately capable of, is kind of like only ever having played the first Doom, and then assuming that there just wasn't any room for improvement beyond that technological level.

I don't think any of us "pro turn-based" proponents here would claim that very much effort has been put into advancing the genre lately. Or that there's really much more than a niche market at the moment. Or that a fully turn-based RPG would sell as well as Fallout 3 has.

But I still don't care about any of that. The point is simply that's what I'd really like to play.

I don't see why not. Procedural animation and modern technology could easily open tons of new options on the turn-based front. The very fact that the computer is allowed to pause and catch up with it's calculations without having to maintain a constant framerate during all of this action also opens up avenues for more detailed effects. Not to mention that taking away the limitations of button presses out of the equation could very conceivably open up tons more options for virtually any interaction.

Let's take making an Unarmed attack in Fallout: New Vegas as an example (as it's been somewhat expanded from Fallout 3 in that area.) Essentially, you're limited to using the one button press for an attack. On occasion you might do a special attack. And you can combine that left-click (or trigger button depending on whether you're playing on PC or console, and how you've mapped your keys,) with a movement to open up a couple of other special attacks. (ie, moving back while holding down "attack," etc.) You're still limited by what a player can be expected to be able to do with a controller or a mouse and keyboard in a short space of time. So using F:NV's template as an example, the most options you'll ever be able to choose from is 10. (ie - pressing "attack," holding "attack," pressing "attack" while moving in any of the four possible directions, holding "attack" while moving in any of the four possible directions.)

That might sound like plenty - but I doubt a game designer is ever even going to use that many for a real-time game. I don't see your average player being able to effectively keep track of that many options, decide which to use (much less which combination will activate it) in the amount of time necessary for it to be effective.

Turn based simply doesn't have these limitations. I could have an infinite variety of ways to perform an unarmed attack on an enemy. Context-sensitive menus and well-designed interface could make it very natural and easy to select from a massive variety of options to decide the best attack to choose for any possible situation. Take the classic "Bruce Lee" example. Now, the real Bruce Lee in a fight has hundreds of variables he's going to be weighing (as a trained master of the martial arts) during a fight. He's going to be able to instinctively and immediately decide which of the hundreds of options he has, to choose the best possible attack for any imaginable situation. Me, roleplaying as Bruce Lee in a real-time game - I'm not going to have access to a fraction of those attacks; and even if I did I'm not going to have the capability to pull most of them off, much less be able to do so as quickly as Bruce Lee. My "Bruce" character is being held back by my own limitations as a mere mortal.

Me, roleplaying as Bruce Lee in a turn-based RPG, however - I have that same amount of options potentially at my disposal.

Now, a lot of people aren't going to care about that. Current market trends show that most gamers don't. I'm just saying that I do. The latter is preferable to me.

^so you support TB?

No it is not. It is true to movement, but otherwise highly more "unrealistic" (what with circlesrafing and characters with bad perception being snipers - unless they too smell their enemies through the sights - and all).
Turndbased does, indeed have true-to-lfe roleplayrealism if it is put there, even more so at times than realtime playing.
Nuff said. :thumbsup:


:spotted owl:

:thumbsup: Indeed.

Ace hanlon supports this message.

And im out :wavey: